Trident move 'will increase nuclear threat'

The government's decision to replace the Trident missile system will encourage nuclear proliferation and deepen Britain's dependency on the US, a parliamentary inquiry into the future of the deterrent was told yesterday. Anti-nuclear campaigners told the Commons defence committee that last month's white paper on the deterrent avoided the issue of what kind of warheads would go on the missiles.

Bruce Kent, vice-president of CND, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, told the MPs that the white paper did not say "who would be deterred, how, and with what". It was a "green light" to other countries, he added. In written evidence, Scottish CND questioned the government promise to cut operational warheads from fewer than 200 to fewer than 160. The white paper did not propose any reduction in warheads - up to 48 per submarine - it said, adding that the the proposed lower-yield warhead heightened the risk of Britain using a nuclear weapon.

John Ainslie, of Scottish CND, questioned the government's insistence that Britain's Trident guidance system and software were "wholly British". A document declassified under the US freedom of information act suggests Britain relies on the US for nuclear warheads more than the government has admitted. The white paper says Britain's warheads are designed and manufactured in the UK. But the US document reveals that tests on British Trident and US warheads were identical.

The white paper says Trident's current nuclear warhead design is "likely to last into the 2020s," but adds: "We do not yet have sufficient information to judge precisely how long we can retain it in service". Decisions on a new warhead would probably have to be taken in the next parliament. Disarmament campaigners told the MPs that the decision to replace Trident submarines was premature and could be delayed for up to 10 years - the view of the Liberal Democrats and independent analysts.